Preparedness for when

nuatha

Karmacat wrote: »

On a slightly different topic ... thinking of the nannying by businesses and organisations in general. My road is being used for a street party in 8 days time, and the local housing association was going door to door advising people not to park their cars in the road. At first I thought it was to help people, but I realised later it was about wanting the road car-free. And they wanted me to sign a printout that they were keeping, saying that they'd advised me to move my car.

I took it to read it, but I didn't sign it. As an instance of ar se covering, it seemed really excessive, and I'm not prepared to sign a piece of paper to prove (to who? their boss?) that somebody knocked at my door. Weird.

I suspect that isn't proof that someone knocked on your door, that its a signed admission that you'd been warned about the street party and any damage to your vehicle which you had parked in the street would not be their liability. I am known to be cynical about these things - generally because being cynical proves to be accurate.

I've just received a leaflet advising me of various parking restrictions affecting the town at the end of the month, including no vehicular access to the street I used to live on - several of my former neighbours are disabled and are apparently expected to use alternate parking a mile or so away.
It used to be that these things were arranged by consent and negotiation rather than by dictat.

MrsLurcherwalker wrote: »

What I am interested in is how a yes or no vote will change daily life and the future here in the UK. If only someone in politics/economics would actually give me some facts and stop saying that leaving is a leap into the unknown. Surely there must be some actualities that can be given?

There really aren't - and its not just Leave that's a step in the dark, we don't know the consequences of a Remain vote either.
I do believe that we were better off as a nation as the heart of the Commonwealth and as the Commonwealth's bridge to the Common Market. However our political masters decided to end our trading arrangements with the Commonwealth and join the Common Market (without ever having a mandate to do so IIRC) in the process inflicting severe economic damage on the Commonwealth countries. We then had a referendum on staying in or leaving - we'd burnt our bridges and leaving would not return us to the status quo ante, so staying was probably the more sensible option. The '80s and much of the '90s were spent opposing much of what EU was planning and trying to carve out special deals for the UK rather than trying to reform the whole system, we've been the awkward relative everyone would rather ignore ever since.
There are several visions of the future of the EU, some more probable than others, however we don't actually know what is going to happen - The USA has been a prime mover to have Turkey as part of the EU, largely resisted by major EU players until recently. The refugee crisis caused the first serious attempts to have a closer integration between the EU and Turkey and everything seemed to be moving in that direction, until Germany passes a parliamentary resolution recognising its own complicity in the Ottoman's attempted genocide of the Armenian people, and Turkey retaliates by withdrawing its ambassador from Germany.
Will that prevent a future membership deal?
Will the Ukraine crisis reignite?
We've had several years of which country would be the first to exit the Euro and no one being able to predict how that would work, or whether that would lead to a European wide financial meltdown.

The Remain campaign has two advantages, one is inertia, people don't like change, and if they have to have change they'd rather it was slow. Vote Leave is a vote for major rapid change. The other advantage is that there are more glimmers of what the future might hold as part of the EU - there's those existing visions, but there is still no certainty (and there's not even a guarantee that change would be gradual).

My vote was in the postbox in time for this morning's collection, I've voted for what I believe may be the better outcome but the only certainty about it is that when the results are declared I will have agreed with a large number of people and disagreed with another large number of people, but we will have to make the best of whatever the collective decision is and face the consequences.
(and that whatever happens there'll be those on both sides who won't be happy with the outcome)

[Deleted User]

I very much hope that this is NOT just a paper exercise to give the appearance of democracy but the outcome of a properly fair vote by the people of the land. I hope that a fair count will decide the leave or stay decision of eligible voters and that it is not a pre decided result and not just a placatory gesture to have a 'free' vote on something this important. I guess we'll just have to wait and see won't we?

NewShadow

Sharing in case people find this interesting/ though provoking/ useful/ amusing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-UbT0g9A8c

2.5 minutes of an interview with a former Norwegian Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Development discussing the arguments presented to the people of Norway prior to their rejection of the EU.

nuatha

MrsLurcherwalker wrote: »

I very much hope that this is NOT just a paper exercise to give the appearance of democracy but the outcome of a properly fair vote by the people of the land. I hope that a fair count will decide the leave or stay decision of eligible voters and that it is not a pre decided result and not just a placatory gesture to have a 'free' vote on something this important. I guess we'll just have to wait and see won't we?

There's substantial investment on both sides, I can't see this being an excuse for a "fix." Aside from anything else, that would provoke a massive civil uprising - Brits are really good and putting up and grumbling as long as fair play has been done. Remove the fair play and we would have politicians decorating lamp posts.

[Deleted User]

How would we know???

Cheapskate

Good point, MrsL, we probably wouldn't know until it was far too late; some sort of leak and 'public enquiry' 10 years down the line.... :rotfl:

A x

jk0

mummy2threeboys wrote: »

Mrsmoneypenny must get my Butt sorted out, been saying that for 15 years!

Probably too late now.

boultdj

nuatha wrote: »

There's substantial investment on both sides, I can't see this being an excuse for a "fix." Aside from anything else, that would provoke a massive civil uprising - Brits are really good and putting up and grumbling as long as fair play has been done. Remove the fair play and we would have politicians decorating lamp posts.

Is it bad of me to go get my pitchfork just in case........

Welcome back cheapskate and hello to all the new bods come to talk to us.

ivyleaf

Karmacat wrote: »

On a slightly different topic ... thinking of the nannying by businesses and organisations in general. My road is being used for a street party in 8 days time, and the local housing association was going door to door advising people not to park their cars in the road. At first I thought it was to help people, but I realised later it was about wanting the road car-free. And they wanted me to sign a printout that they were keeping, saying that they'd advised me to move my car.

I took it to read it, but I didn't sign it. As an instance of ar se covering, it seemed really excessive, and I'm not prepared to sign a piece of paper to prove (to who? their boss?) that somebody knocked at my door. Weird.

It sounds to me as if they wanted you to sign to agree that you'd been advised to move your car, so that if it gets damaged during the street party the the housing assn can say they are not liable to pay for any damage because they warned you to move it.

ETA Oops, didn't see nuatha's post before writing mine!

mrs-moneypenny

I agree with both ivyleaf and nuathas interpretation of the letter you were asked to sign. Well done on not signing.